Would you ever, for any reason (including not loving you or believing in you), lock your children in the basement and torture them??

This is a simple YES/NO question (with follow up) - (assume you have kids if you don't). Please do not dance around the question, hem/haw, or try to change the subject.

If your answer is yes, then please attempt to explain how such an action is moral.

If your answer is no, then please attempt to explain how it is moral for your God to do so.

median

p.s. - For those of you who will want to argue that "God doesn't send us to hell. We send ourselves" let me refer you to your own bible. According to it, he clearly does throw people in.

Matthew 7:19 - 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.Revelation 19:20 - And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had done the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur.

2 Thessalonians 1:5-9 This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might,

Matthew 25:41 - 41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Better a small inconvenience on earth than an eternity in Hell. Our stay in this vale of tears is brief and a preparation for the Life Beyond. Nothing here is of consequence if you only believe:

3“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.4Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.5Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.7Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.8Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.9Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.10Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

If those children believe, and we are all born with a knowledge of God or an ability to seek Him out, their future is assured.

The evil we see on the Earth is a direct consequence of man acting in disobedience to God (NT). Either that or God has done it for punishment (OT).

Locking kids up in a basement and beating them to death, does not affect the chances of the children going to Heaven. If you truly repent, and accept Jesus, then you too can go to heaven, where you can see them again (whether they want to see you or not). In Heaven both you and they will understand why what happened, happened, so everyone is OK.

Now, what's your problem? Hell? You know how to avoid it - If you can't do the time, don't do the crime, and if the devil tempts you, repent and accept Jesus.

« Last Edit: March 20, 2013, 03:28:50 PM by Graybeard »

Logged

Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Better a small inconvenience on earth than an eternity in Hell. Our stay in this vale of tears is brief and a preparation for the Life Beyond. Nothing here is of consequence if you only believe:

3“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.4Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.5Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.7Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.8Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.9Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.10Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

If those children believe, and we are all born with a knowledge of God or an ability to seek Him out, their future is assured.

The evil we see on the Earth is a direct consequence of man acting in disobedience to God (NT). Either that or God has done it for punishment (OT).

Locking kids up in a basement and beating them to death, does not affect the chances of the children going to Heaven. If you truly repent, and accept Jesus, then you too can go to heaven, where you can see them again (whether they want to see you or not). In Heaven both you and they will understand why what happened, happened, so everyone is OK.

Now, what's your problem? Hell? You know how to avoid it - If you can't do the time, don't do the crime, and if the devil tempts you, repent and accept Jesus.

HA! This is a decent attempt at a reply to my question...but not quite good enough (especially the red herring part ). "Small inconveniences", the "persecuted", and/or whether or not children believe in Jesus is an entirely different subject. I'm asking believers to attempt to justify their belief that it is moral for their Yahweh deity to torture non-believers in hell (for any length of time) when they themselves know that it is immoral (Can you say double standard?). As usual, I am expecting a divine command theory type response ("Because he says so..." etc - which is quite easily refuted).

median

p.s. - I had a Christian apologist once admit to me (in a similar discussion) that he knows his God is an asshole, but must obey him no matter what, b/c otherwise this deity will "kick his ass". HA! Naturally, I asked him if he had ever even considered (critically) whether or not this alleged deity actually exists (whether its possible that he is mistaken). I got no response.

p.s. - For those of you who will want to argue that "God doesn't send us to hell. We send ourselves" .....

Personally, I think we can even ignore the Bible, just by adding two subsidiary questions.

1) If you saw your child taking actions that would lead to them being locked in a basement and tortured, would you go to them in person and take every action you possibly could to help them (as opposed to, say, hoping that someone else will tell them about a letter you wrote to them but didn't send)?

and 2) If you became aware that your child was locked in a basement and being tortured, would you immediately storm the basement with as many mates as you could muster up, and free them immediately? Or would you leave them there for an indefinite period?

I'm asking believers to attempt to justify their belief that it is moral for their Yahweh deity to torture non-believers in hell (for any length of time) when they themselves know that it is immoral (Can you say double standard?). As usual, I am expecting a divine command theory type response ("Because he says so..." etc - which is quite easily refuted).

"Because he can" is pretty much the only answer I've ever seen, and when you think about it, it's the only possible response. The few attempts at justification boil down to god's perfect nature. That is to say, anything god does is good by definition, no matter how evil it may seem to be. The horrifying things he does, or orders his followers to do, are neither wrong, evil, nor immoral because god can't possibly do things that are wrong, evil, or immoral.

It is a good example of how difficult it can be to deal with ideas and beliefs that are deeply embedded in the subconscious. Some believers are less offended that god would order his followers to rape young girls, than they are that you would find such a god to be a despicable person.

2. Here's the tough bit - we as parents as not the same as a god who created everything for two important reasons.

We are mere mortals, juts like our children. We know we have limited lifespans and want to make sure we get the very best we can of a life for both ourselves and for our children. It goes against our very nature as parents (well, for most of us anyway) to do such terrible things to our own children.

On the other hand, god, who has eternity to work things out, has a wholly different perspective on things. For example, he knows how things will work out for each individual human. Unlike human parents, when he sees individual actions he also know which cations will lead to downfall. In the end, though, he can only tolerate people coming to his domain of heaven if they are already believers in him and do his will. Then they will fit in well with the others who are already there as a further addition to the zombie worshippers. If a person is not going to fit in, then clearly, for the benefit of the zombies already there he has to send them elsewhere to be punished for not conforming to his will. How else could he act?

God's principle problem, as I see it, is his non-existence. He has been created in the minds of people, probably priests, who have gradually increased his power and potential over the years to ensure the obedience of the people, oh, and to keep the money rolling in, too. If we consult some of the earlier Psalms, we find the god is expected to deal with the evil people in society, during their earthly lives. The fact that the god failed to do this meant that another place for punishment had to be found and what better place than after people diem and, coincidentally, where no one can check up. Hence in later writings we have god asked to make sure evil people are punished in the next life.

With the scary place of punishment in place, evangelists have used it to get people to accept the faith and, thus, avoid hell altogether and it worked well right into the last century. Its not working now, though, as people see that it is invented and not something that could really exist.

Thus god avoids the problem or being moral or not as, being an invention of man, he follows whatever people want him to be and we have had lots of versions. Whatever it is said that he does is what some men at some time wanted to say to scare people.

Of course, I could be wrong and god might be real. I accept that but I will be wanted some real evidence before I accept that god does exist but, after posting here for a while, I am not expecting anything very soon.

Logged

No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

p.s. - For those of you who will want to argue that "God doesn't send us to hell. We send ourselves" .....

Personally, I think we can even ignore the Bible, just by adding two subsidiary questions.

1) If you saw your child taking actions that would lead to them being locked in a basement and tortured, would you go to them in person and take every action you possibly could to help them (as opposed to, say, hoping that someone else will tell them about a letter you wrote to them but didn't send)?

and 2) If you became aware that your child was locked in a basement and being tortured, would you immediately storm the basement with as many mates as you could muster up, and free them immediately? Or would you leave them there for an indefinite period?

- - - - -

Why do we never get believers coming to answer these questions?

For #1, "But God is all powerful you see, and he has a 'divine plan'. His ways are higher than our ways. So we just have to 'have faith' - to which...I CALL BULLSHIT! Anyone can makeup anything about any invisible Santa Claus character they want. Of course, I used to do exactly that when I was a fundy apologist. Ever notice how Christians today tend to make-up, and agree with, only the theological positions they find most convenient to what fits them? Yeah, we all did it but wouldn't admit it.

For #2, I think (as an apologist) I would have tried to answer the same thing. "God's ways are not our ways. He has the right to do what he wants with his creation, just like you can do what you want when you create something." [Divine Command Theory = Enter the Euthyphro Dilemma!]

To the last question...

BECAUSE THEY CAN'T!

It is only people like Matt Slick (carm.org) or William Lane Craig who try (but of course fail miserably).

I'm asking believers to attempt to justify their belief that it is moral for their Yahweh deity to torture non-believers in hell (for any length of time) when they themselves know that it is immoral (Can you say double standard?). As usual, I am expecting a divine command theory type response ("Because he says so..." etc - which is quite easily refuted).

"Because he can" is pretty much the only answer I've ever seen, and when you think about it, it's the only possible response. The few attempts at justification boil down to god's perfect nature. That is to say, anything god does is good by definition, no matter how evil it may seem to be. The horrifying things he does, or orders his followers to do, are neither wrong, evil, nor immoral because god can't possibly do things that are wrong, evil, or immoral.

It is a good example of how difficult it can be to deal with ideas and beliefs that are deeply embedded in the subconscious. Some believers are less offended that god would order his followers to rape young girls, than they are that you would find such a god to be a despicable person.

I LOVE this post!

What's so perfectly beautiful, but so incredibly flawed and irrational, is this Christian idea that, "Anything God does is good by definition". We MUST answer: HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?!

Christians don't know. They ASSUME!

It all comes back to, "Well, X person/people told me the bible is the word of God and that made me feel good inside. So I accepted it and believe it b/c I have no other explanation." So basically, what sounds good...is good. HA! I must laugh at them, and myself, because that's what I used to do too (inside secretly). But it's absurd to assume your position in advance. Unfortunately that's what they all do.

Don't bother asking a Christian this question, they're twisted logic and reasoning why it's okay for their biblegod to torture people is because "His ways are not our ways." or "God is perfect therefore we should not question his ways." Any response you get from a Christian when debating with them on the evil of Hell and how a perfectly loving God would not create such a place will be completely retarded. You can't get through to most fanatical Christians, they're so brainwashed that getting them to see how idiotic and insane their beliefs are is a total waste of your time because chances are extremely high that you will not get through to them. Don't ever expect to get a rational intelligent response from a fanatical Christian. Ever.

« Last Edit: March 21, 2013, 04:36:52 PM by J0SH »

Logged

"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called religion." -Robert M. Pirsig“Be the change you want to see in the world.” -Mahatma Gandhi

I am not asking what is truth, even though I seek it, I will know when truth is in front of me, when it is internally consistent, coherent with knowledge, congruent with like experience, useful for helping me organize my thinking, this is all I can ask in seeking the truth.

NO! NEVER! Well, unless, they don't love me or don't believe in me, in which case, obviously I would torture my own children forever in my basement.

Actually what I am going to do is it set it up so they will not love me nor believe in me, so that I can make sure that they will definitely end up in my basement of torture and tears. I love them, after all.

Sometimes watching people to try an defend God as somebody who's kind a loving when being presented with all the sick and cruel things they've claimed he's done reminds me of abuse victims trying to explain why their partner is a good, loving and kind person and how they're the ones to blame for their own suffering.

Why is it we can berate people for abusing their wives, husbands, children, parents, friends or even complete strangers, how is it we see them as cruel, manipulative and just plain abhorrent and yet when a deity does it, suddenly we've got to see it in a completely different light, how the victims must have been evil and how the deity must be good.

The simple truth is, I wouldn't torture somebody.

People also make the argument that God is trying to teach us, that there is a given reason for suffering. They'll used parenting as an analogy in this respect and yet, my parents were able to raise me into somebody who's good without the need for me to suffer greatly. If God requires cruelty and extreme levels of suffering to teach, then He is a poor teacher. For somebody who is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent, you'd think He'd be able to have man become good without the need to butcher and torture his children.

Logged

“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto MusashiWarning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Sometimes watching people to try an defend God as somebody who's kind a loving when being presented with all the sick and cruel things they've claimed he's done reminds me of abuse victims trying to explain why their partner is a good, loving and kind person and how they're the ones to blame for their own suffering.

Why is it we can berate people for abusing their wives, husbands, children, parents, friends or even complete strangers, how is it we see them as cruel, manipulative and just plain abhorrent and yet when a deity does it, suddenly we've got to see it in a completely different light, how the victims must have been evil and how the deity must be good.

The simple truth is, I wouldn't torture somebody.

People also make the argument that God is trying to teach us, that there is a given reason for suffering. They'll used parenting as an analogy in this respect and yet, my parents were able to raise me into somebody who's good without the need for me to suffer greatly. If God requires cruelty and extreme levels of suffering to teach, then He is a poor teacher. For somebody who is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent, you'd think He'd be able to have man become good without the need to butcher and torture his children.

Gawd doesnt choose to butcher and torture his children, they choose to be butchered and tortured...

We know it is never really a choice, because for it to be a choice there needs to be knowledge and the variables need to be set. How does a person who does not know God make the choice to defy him? Yes, people may know him by name, but for many, his name means about as much as the name of any of the characters in SpongeBob Squarepants. Of course, if Patrick Star were to make himself known as something that's real and not fictional and said, "give me a krabby patty and be rewarded, refuse me and die" then you can pretty much say, if they turn around and say, "make your own damn patty you stupid starfish!" you pretty much can determine that they made their choice - a bit extreme, but I suppose there are some pretty extreme vegans out there. However, a person doesn't generally choose to be under the command of another's tyranny, their choices in life could well lead them to that place, but to say they made the choice to be there suggests they knew they would reach that destination.

It's like with heaven and hell. I don't understand why people suggest God gave people free will. If He did, He would not offer supreme happiness for those who obey and severe punishment for disobedience. It's be like pointing a gun at somebody's head and saying "suck me off", only with worse consequences. I wonder, if that person sucking me off had the freedom to choose? Particularly when the brain is hardwired for survival. Of course, for it be a fair analogy, my existence would need to be ambiguous, meaning only those who have been convinced I exist will suck me off. So if God really does exist, all that's happening, people are being fucked off without them making a conscious decision of it.

In Christianity and similar religions, your actions are only seen to be a means to an end, but those actions themselves not the end.

« Last Edit: March 24, 2013, 05:43:40 PM by Seppuku »

Logged

“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto MusashiWarning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Gawd doesnt choose to butcher and torture his children, they choose to be butchered and tortured...

Like I said in my 2nd subsidiary question way up there....it doesn't matter. It's the equivalent of rephrasing the question to:

"If you discovered that - due to the poor choices they had made - your children were currently locked in someone ELSE''S basement being tortured, would you immediately descend on that basement with all the force you could in order to get them out?"

Point being, hell should never exist, should never HAVE existed for more than a second. The moment "God" became aware of its existence, he should have shut it down.

IF, he is the loving parent that Christians would have us believe he is.

Gawd doesnt choose to butcher and torture his children, they choose to be butchered and tortured...

I know Christians attempt to use this argument all the time, but if fails miserably b/c it doesn't align with their own bible (see my OP). Their theology is quite out of step with what the bible "teaches" on this subject, which is unfortunately all too often the case. I have never found one professing Christian (not a single one) who actually aligns his/her theology directly from what the bible actually teaches. Each of them finds unique ways of picking n choosing which passages to take seriously and which ones to spin, rationalize, or downright ignore. The bible very clearly states that Yahweh SENDS people to hell, and nowhere does it say "you send yourself". This idea is relatively new Christian concept (as religion evolves with man) that has derived from religionists realizing how damaging a position it is to their very concept of a loving God. So, instead of admitting their God is a false (as they should), they just evolve and change their theology - twisting/ignoring bible verses that are inconvenient to what they presupposed to be true from the beginning.

The answer? Keep exposing them for doing this - especially to young people~! The tides WILL turn.

"God works in mysterious ways." - The absolute WORST justification for evil that I have EVER heard, and I hear it all the time from christians.

Yes, so terrible but true. Of course, Muslims say this too and when we press either of them on this issue their arguments end is vicious circularity repeatedly.

SKEPTIC: How do you know this God works in mysterious ways? BELIEVER: B/c my holy book says so. SKEPTIC: How do you know this book is 'holy' or inspired by a deity? BELIEVER: B/c I had an experience with him! SKEPTIC: How do you know your experience was with this deity? BELIEVER: B/c my holy book says if I pray and seek him earnestly I will find him.SKEPTIC: HUH...??

So the believer ASSUMED what someone else told him (sold him) - that this book is "holy" and from some God (Santa Claus deity) and when challenged on the question of why he accepted it he can't stand to think that much of his life might have been wasted on a lie or falsity. So instead he makes irrational justifications, rationalizations, SPIN, and excuses to hide his bad investment.

Hell: it took 2000 years for the concept of hell as fire and brimstone along with eternal torment to develop. Today pretty much everyone is familiar with the well known Christian concept of hell.

What I have wondered is what was the Jewish concept of hell in the early first century when Christianity started and was basically a Jewish cult. What was the understanding of the people then of hell because I am sure it was not what it is today.

Hell: it took 2000 years for the concept of hell as fire and brimstone along with eternal torment to develop. Today pretty much everyone is familiar with the well known Christian concept of hell.

What I have wondered is what was the Jewish concept of hell in the early first century when Christianity started and was basically a Jewish cult. What was the understanding of the people then of hell because I am sure it was not what it is today.

There was no concept of a hell. Their idea was of 'sheol' (pit, destruction, abyss) having to do with annihilation.

Hell: it took 2000 years for the concept of hell as fire and brimstone along with eternal torment to develop. Today pretty much everyone is familiar with the well known Christian concept of hell.

What I have wondered is what was the Jewish concept of hell in the early first century when Christianity started and was basically a Jewish cult. What was the understanding of the people then of hell because I am sure it was not what it is today.

There was no concept of a hell. Their idea was of 'sheol' (pit, destruction, abyss) having to do with annihilation.

References to damnation in The Dead Sea Scrolls might be worth checking out, since they were around the same time period. I did a quick check, and the depiction is quite xian-like. Of course, IIRC, the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls were a cult of some kind, so they may not represent the Judaism of the Temple.

One of the problems of interpreting the NT texts is that one never knows if Jesus is represented with his own words or whether the author is 'putting words in his mouth' so to speak.

If the former is the case and the words given to Jesus were his own, then I think he left quite a little trail of suggestions that there is a hell. Look at the stories of the great feast when people are thrown into outer darkness and there is 'wailing and gnashing of teeth'. There are lots of references to Beelzebub (presumably the Lord of Flies, Beelzevul, in the Elijah story) so we might well think that Jesus was the author of the concept of hell.

On the other hand, if the word of Jesus were written by the author of the text, then what is represented in the view of the church in the latter part of the 1st century when, maybe, there were problems with people who did not accept the teaching or the authority of the church leaders and the content about hell was to frighten them . This makes sense when we think how the church throughout the time since the gospels were written has used the idea of hell the scare people into belief. In Victorian England, for example, clergy would preach fire and brimstone from the pulpit to encourage the congregation to greater piety. The Scottish Church reformer, John Knox was know for this sort of preaching too.

So, take a choice as to the source of the concept of hell. Personally, I prefer the latter but take your pick!

Logged

No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

There is no Christianity. There are only Chrianities (pl.). Thousands of "denominations" (sects) all disagree with each other on how to interpret the text. Some of them try to talk about the "the fundamentals" but that is nonsense because hundreds of others sects disagree with them on those subjects too. Fact is, the bible (flat out) contradicts itself in nearly all 66 books (see below). So for Christians to try the "my interpretation is the correct one" approach is really futile. There is no one correct interpretation and there is no deity behind it (giving the correct interpretation, updating, or validating anything). He's not checking in!

So, it's major/popular doctrines are BS and Christians are simply making up their own version of Christianity, as they go along, to suit what they already wanted to believe.